1) Who is Whitney Houston, and why should we care?
2) Have you noticed the attempt to hurt the
US military?
3) Can you see the attempts to instigate racial
fights?
4) John Kerry; a tough hockey player? Or flea-bitten
fool?
5) Peggy is still calling me on the phone
6) Does "Marry The Night" have hidden meanings?
7) Why is Jennifer Aniston in the news so often?
Conclusion

1) Who is Whitney Houston, and
why should we care?

When I first saw news reports of Whitney Houston's death, I
recognized her name as a female singer, but I did not know much else about
her. Apparently I never listen to her style of music.

I ignored the reports of her death but, as the days passed, I noticed
that there were hundreds of news reports about her, and they were
occurring day after day. Why was her death getting so much attention?

I have since listened to a couple of her songs, and I can see that she
had phenomenal singing talent, but
talented people die every day, so there has to be some other reason that
so many journalists are publishing so many articles about her death. After
glancing through some of the articles, my conclusion is that "the Jews"
murdered her, and they are struggling to do "damage control".

The reports about her death don't make sense to me. For example,
she was in her large, luxury hotel room on a pleasant Saturday afternoon
with several other people. She ordered lunch and began to eat, but during
the meal she decided to stop eating and take a
bath. Instead of leaving her food on the table (in the photo),
she took a turkey sandwich and some jalapenos into the bathroom. She was
planning to eat them
in the bathroom after she was finished with
her bath.

Does her behavior make sense to you? How often do people stop
eating their lunch and rush to the bathroom to take a bath? And of those
people, how many also take some food into the bathroom so that they have
something to eat in the bathroom after they are finished with their
bath?

TMZ is a good source of photos and amusing remarks. For example, they
have this
photo of her at the swimming pool, and they have such amusing remarks
as, "Authorities have told family members Whitney
may have suffered a fatal reaction from mixing drugs and alcohol."
Yes, indeed, she may have died as a
result of mixing drugs and alcohol, but there is no evidence of that,
so why are they saying she "may" have died from it?

I suspect that she was murdered
by her "friends"

I wonder if she stopped eating because she wasn't feeling very
good. Perhaps one of her "friends" put a drug into her food or drink, and
when she complained about feeling sick, her friend recommended that she
take a bath to relax. Her friend may have also filled the bathtub with
warm water to encourage her to get into the bathtub.

However, she may have died before she got into the bathtub. When
the Los Angeles coroner was asked if she was naked
in the bathtub, he refused
to answer the question. It's possible that he was simply irritated
with the idiotic questions, but it's also possible that she died before
she had been able to remove all of her clothing. Or perhaps she was murdered
in the hotel room, and then her friends tossed her into the bathtub because
they have some strange fascination with "baptizing" their victims.

Have you noticed how many famous people have died suspiciously from
drowning? For example, Brian Jones, of
the Rolling Stones, died from drowning in his swimming pool. Jim Morrison
was supposedly
found dead in a bathtub, but there was no autopsy, and apparently nobody
even saw his body, so the bathtub story may have been fabricated simply
because they have a fascination with drownings.

Update 8 April 2012The coroner's report on Whitney Houston's death has been released,
but it leaves me with more questions than answers. The initial news reports
suggested that she died from drugs and alcohol, and the reporters pointed
out to us that there were empty beer containers and champagne in the room,
but the coroner
said there was no alcohol in her body. So, if she was not
drinking, then why didn't any of her "friends" in the room inform the reporters
of this important fact? There are reports that cocaine was found in the
room, but how do we know that Whitney Houston was using the cocaine?

The coroner said that there was not enough drugs in her body to cause
death. The coroner is claiming that she drowned in a bathtub of "extremely
hot water" while face down. The coroner also wrote that she
had "a cut lip and a scald mark on her back", and that there was
"skin slippage" on various parts of her body, and there was "a bloody purge
coming from her nose."

Update 9 April 2012Some autopsy drawings and details are here.
The British newspaper The Sun publishes shocking
comments, including laying the groundwork to kill her daughter, Bobbi,
and blame it on drugs. For example:
• swathes of skin were burnt off
Whitney’s back as she plunged into the scalding water.
• She may have been so out of her
mind on drugs she did not notice how hot her bath was, according to medical
sources.
• she had a scar on her inner left
forearm that sources claim may have been self-inflicted.
• A source said: “The fortune Whitney
left is enough to let Bobbi spiral into a life of parties and excess —
and end up just like her mum.”

The coroner's report doesn't explain how Whitney Houston might have
drowned, so CNN asked Dr. Drew Pinsky, apparently an expert on suspicious
deaths, to fill in the details, and he said that, "Somebody who's now upside
down in a bathtub could easily seize and drown." So, he thinks that after
she became upside down in the bathtub, she had a seizure, and then she
drowned.

The coroner's report said that there was no
signs of foul play, but how many people get into a bathtub of scalding
hot water? And how did she become face down? How did she get a scald
mark on her back? And why was blood coming out of her nose? How about
the "skin slippage"?

I suspect that she was murdered, and possibly tortured, by the Jews
who dominate the entertainment business.

I also suspect that the Jews were involved with the killing of Trayvon
Martin in order to instigate racial fights and distract the black people
from Whitney Houston's death, and since that was a failure, they are now
trying to arrange
for neo-Nazis to travel to Florida. Have you seen the
evidence that the neo-Nazi groups are under the control of Jews?
Have you noticed that the neo-Nazis, who supposedly hate Jews, have no
desire to expose the Jewish involvement in 9/11 or other crimes? They also
get lots of publicity by Jews in the media and on the Internet.

Hopefully you can see that the Jews are routinely trying to trick us
into shifting our attention away from Israel and Jews
and over to black people, Nazis, Muslims, Iranians, Chinese, and other
people.

Learn from other people's mistakes

I did not write this article in order to justify my speculation
that Whitney Houston was murdered, or to speculate on who may have murdered
her. Rather, the attempts by journalists to convince us that her death
was an accident are so absurd that I thought this incident would
be a useful
educational tool to help
you to notice the tricks that some journalists are using to manipulate
us. You might also benefit by being reminded that you must be very careful
of who you trust.

I don't understand how an adult can look at these news reports
and not wonder if we are being deceived by the journalists and police.
I think that the willingness of the public to accept these idiotic explanations
should be used as more evidence that most people are mindless
sheep who should not be allowed to vote or influence society.

When Michael Jackson died mysteriously,
the journalists had some partially sensible explanations, but I don't think
any
of the explanations for Houston's death are even close to sensible. I'll
start with the most extreme example that I'm aware of.

Each of us is our own worst
enemy

In a television interview
with Diane Sawyer, Whitney Houston was talking about her drug problems,
and she told Sawyer that nobody makes her do anything, that she is responsible
for her life and problems. She admitted that she is her worst enemy.

I would describe Houston's remarks as a sign that she had the intelligence
to understand the concept that she is in control of her life, and that
she was willing to be critical of herself and take responsibility
for her behavior. Compare Houston's attitude to the people who blame McDonald's
restaurants for their obesity, or drug dealers for their drug
abuse, or their parents for their alcoholism.

I think everybody ought to be responsible for themselves and be aware
that each of us is our own worst enemy. I've written about this concept,
and in my 15Jan2008 audio file I
pointed out that this concept also applies to all organizations, including
nations. Every nation's worst enemy is its own
people, not some foreign nation.

I was amazed to find journalists using Whitney Houston's intelligent
remarks as a way to justify her mysterious death!

The journalists are trying to fool us into believing that when she said
that she is her worst enemy, that she was admitting to being some type
of suicidal, self-destructive maniac
who either enjoys hurting herself, or who has so little control over herself
that she cannot stop herself from self-destruction. How can an adult fall
for this idiotic trick?

A friend of Whitney Houston, Nikki Haskell,
said that "someone was supposed to be with Houston
at all times, including in the bathroom, to prevent a tragedy like this".

However, if Houston needed adult supervision in the bathroom,
how did she function in life? Do you realize how mentally incompetent
a person has to be in order to need supervision in the bathroom?

How can any adult read these reports without wondering if her "friends"
are liars?

How obvious
does a murder have to be?

The refusal of the ordinary people to think for themselves
makes me wonder how bizarre an accidental death has to be before the majority
of people - including my own gullible relatives! - suspect that it was
actually a murder.

For example, imagine that Whitney Houston was found dead in her kitchen,
and that there were dozens of chocolate bars stuffed so tightly
in her mouth and throat that she couldn't breathe.

Now imagine the television news reporters playing a portion of a video
interview in which Whitney Houston admitted that she has trouble resisting
chocolate, and the reporters are implying that her inability to control
her cravings for chocolate caused her to accidentally die from stuffing
too
much chocolate into her mouth at one time.

How many of our relatives and neighbors would be gullible enough to
believe that Houston suffocated after stuffing dozens of chocolate
bars into her mouth?

Can we trust the Mickey
Fine pharmacy?

Some news reports tell us that Whitney Houston filled her prescriptions
at the same pharmacy that Michael Jackson
had used; specifically, the Mickey
Fine Pharmacy of Beverly Hills. What would you think if a news report
that told us, "Whitney Houston died today, and although
police do not know why she died, it is known that she had a home in California,
which is the same state that Michael Jackson was living in!"

It is certainly possible that the Mickey Fine pharmacy is under the
control of criminals, and that they use the pharmacy to kill people, such
as by contaminating their prescriptions with a poison, or by secretly providing
pills that have a much higher strength in order to cause overdoses. Criminals
could also use a pharmacy to prepare people for a murder. For example,
they could put a small amount of a mind altering drug, such as LSD, into
a person's medication, thereby causing him to behave a bit differently
in the days prior to his murder. Then, after the murder, the journalists
could announce that prior to his death, he was behaving erratically, thereby
implying that he was losing his mind or suffering from alcoholism or drug
addiction.

So, although the Mickey Fine pharmacy may be involved in Whitney Houston's
death, the journalists are not considering such a possibility. Rather,
they are mentioning the pharmacy in order to create an image in our mind
of people abusing prescription drugs.

We cannot trust the authorities!

Some people are getting away with their crimes by being in
positions of authority and opposing the crimes that they are involved with.
This fools us into thinking that we can trust them. For a recent example,
did you hear about the Arizona Sheriff, Paul
Babeu, who complains about illegal aliens? He is being accused of having
a homosexual lover who is in the country illegally, and that he
and his lawyer were threatening that illegal alien with deportation if
he did not agree to remain silent about the homosexual relationship. That
Sheriff is just one of many people who complain about illegal aliens but
who secretly use them as gardeners, maids, or lovers.

We want to believe that the authorities and the people in the medical
services are truly concerned about us, but some of them have already been
caught
committing crimes, such as this
paramedic who raped a woman in an ambulance. Some doctors are also
involved with rape and pedophilia, and have you seen this
article that somebody sent me about the possibility that policemen
are taking advantage of unconscious children in hospitals?

It is risky to trust people. Don't be fooled into thinking that the
world's problems are due to the devil, a shortage of oil, or ignorance.
Every one of our problems is caused by the bad
behavior of people.

Who's afraid of an investigation?

With all of the evidence that crime networks are rampant in
every nation, and that the Jews have the biggest and most destructive crime
network of all, we have to investigate everybody on this planet,
including those in pharmacies, ambulances, hospitals, and police departments.

If the Jews did not kill Whitney
Houston, then they have no reason to fear an investigation into
her death. So why are they trying to convince us that her death was an
accident rather than consider the possibility that she was murdered? Why
don't the journalists investigate the people in her hotel room? Why don't
they investigate the police department or the people involved with the
autopsy reports?

Watch for attempts by journalist
to manipulate us

It might help you to be reminded that we are in a battle of
intelligence.
Get into the habit of being suspicious of all journalists, historians,
whistleblowers, investigators, truth tellers, and "experts". Watch out
for their attempts to manipulate our opinions, instigate fights, and exploit
our weaknesses.

For example, notice the adjectives that the journalists are using to
describe Whitney Houston, such as describing her as a "tragic diva", and
that she "partied heavily" and "chatted loudly". Those adjectives are not
providing us with serious information about her. Rather, the journalists
are trying to create an unpleasant image of Whitney Houston.

The journalists who tell us that Houston "chatted
loudly" are providing a good example of the expression "scraping
the bottom of the barrel".

Some journalists tell us that she wanted to see
Jesus, thereby implying that she was a suicidal religious fanatic.

Journalists sometimes quote mysterious "friends" or "sources" that
give her a bad image.

Another example of journalists scraping the bottom of the
barrel
is
this
timeline in which she is described as "jumping in and out of the pool
and doing somersaults in the pool area". Most people would consider that
to be a sign that she was physically active and healthy,
but the journalists are trying to convince us that it is evidence that
she was drunk, mentally unstable, obnoxious, erratic, psychotic, or on
drugs.

Watch out for the Pied
Piper trick

Journalists often quote some supposedly important person in the hope
that we mindlessly follow them.

For example, Celine Dion
and Nikki Haskell
do not consider Houston's death to be suspicious.

We ought to wonder why the journalists are promoting the opinions of
these particular people.

Anything Houston did would be
used against her

As you look over the news reports about Whitney Houston's death,
it should be obvious that no matter what Whitney Houston had done in the
days prior to her death, the Jews would have used it against her. For two
examples:

1) If instead of "partying heavily" and
"chatting loudly", she had been very quiet at the party, and if she didn't
have anything to drink, then the Jews could have described her as being
withdrawn, quiet, and lifeless. They could have described her as depressed,
anti-social, or suicidal, or that she seemed to be suffering from fatigue
or illness. They could also have said that she was so afraid of alcohol
that she refused to have even a small glass of beer or wine. They could
have implied that she was worried that if she had one small drink that
she would quickly resume her bad habit of consuming excessive quantities
of alcohol and drugs.

2) If instead of jumping in and out of
the swimming pool and doing cartwheels, she had just reclined in a lounge
chair the entire time, then the Jews could have described her as going
to a swimming pool but not having the energy to do anything. They could
have described her as behaving like a sickly, 95-year-old woman. The could
have implied that she was on the verge of death. If she had fallen asleep
at the pool, then they could suggest that she was drunk or on drugs, or
living such a wild life that she couldn't stay awake during the daytime.

We do not have any reliable
news sources!

Our information about Whitney Houston is coming from a small
number of journalists, and they are carefully selecting photos, information,
and witnesses to describe what happened. Our only defense is to be
suspicious of the journalists and their information.

The value of surveillance
cameras

A few weeks ago I posted
this file in which I mentioned the value of covering a city with surveillance
cameras - including hotel rooms - and saving the video at a storage center
for a while. That policy would enable us to look at the video from Whitney
Houston's hotel room and figure out exactly what happened to her. If nothing
had happened to her that day, then the video would just sit in storage
for a while, and eventually be erased, so who
would be harmed by such a policy?

Do you
sleep with dogs?

Whitney Houston may have been murdered by her "friends". If
you make bad decisions about who to trust, you may end up becoming a victim
of a con artist, or worse, a murderer. You better take this issue seriously!
We are not living in a world of wonderful
people created by a loving God. Humans are just intelligent
monkeys, and many of them are behaving like savages.

It's important to understand the expression, "Sleep
With Dogs, Get Bit By Fleas." Be careful who you associate with.
Entertainers and politicians are routinely associating with dangerous criminals,
so we shouldn't be surprised when they are beaten, raped, cheated, or murdered
by their "friends".

It's easy to murder people
with problems

It's easy to disguise a murder as an accident if the victim
is known for having problems with drugs, relationships, gambling, or self-esteem.
For example, did David Carradine die because he went too far with his risky
sex act? Or was he murdered?

Since Whitney Houston had cocaine problems in the past, and she was
using prescription drugs in the present, it's possible to fool people into
thinking that her strange death was the result of her drug-related problems.
People with problems have to be especially careful of who their
friends are.

Who is more disgusting? The
criminals
or the sheeple?

The Jews are not getting
away with their crimes because they are too clever for us. Rather, the
majority of people in every nation simply refuse to deal with the problems
of modern society. Also, there doesn't seem to be any shortage of people
who can be bribed with offers of money,
fame, or sex.

I often find myself more disgusted
with the billions of sheeple - including my own relatives! - than I am
with the criminals. The sheeple are inadvertently protecting the criminals,
impeding the progress of the human race, and continuously voting for political
candidates who are obviously incompetent or corrupt. Without the sheeple
as a ball and chain around our legs,
we could bring improvements to this world.

Some of the guests of the hotel where Whitney Houston died are demanding
a refund on the grounds that they were inconvenienced by security
personnel who wanted to verify that they were truly guests of the hotel,
and by the law enforcement personnel who made a lot of noise. The
majority of people will do nothing to stop crime and corruption,
and when they are inconvenienced by it, they expect other people to compensate
them for their suffering!

Imagine a more extreme example of this behavior. Imagine that you are
a passenger on an airplane, and one of the male passengers gets out of
his seat, grabs a young boy, and spends about 15 minutes raping him in
the aisle. Imagine nobody does anything to stop this man. After the flight
is over, imagine the passengers complaining that they want a refund on
the grounds that they were disrupted by the boy's crying, and because the
aisle was blocked during the rape, which made it impossible for them to
get to the bathroom.

Asking the sheeple to help expose or stop the corruption is
like asking a spoiled child to clean his room. They turn
away and make excuses, such
as that they're too old, there's nothing we can do to stop it, they're
too busy, they're too young, they have no influence, or they don't know
what to do. They are not sweet, loving, innocent citizens. They are deserters
during a time of
war. They are irresponsible,
selfish animals.

The popularity
of an item is often meaningless

At the beginning of this article I mentioned that I had initially
ignored Whitney Houston's death, and I suppose some people will interpret
this as an insult to Whitney Houston. However, it's not an insult.
It's actually a very simple concept, but most people don't seem to understand
it, so I will briefly mention it.

Virtually all of the professional singers seem to worry about their
popularity,
but that is an idiotic concern. The
popularity of a singer is not necessarily a reflection of their talent.
Some people are more popular as singers simply because they sing the songs
that appeal to a large audience.

Our emotions encourage us to follow the crowd. We assume that if something
is popular, then it is "better" than something of low popularity. This
is a sensible policy for animals to follow, but humans should think more
often.

In regards to entertainment, most people assume that the singers,
painters, actors, dancers, and musicians who are the most popular are the
most talented, and those popular artists are given awards. For example,
Taylor Swift is often in the news for winning awards and being praised
as a popular country-western singer, but is she popular because she is
more "talented" than the other singers? I don't think so. I think her popularity
is due to her music crossing the boundary between country-western and other
styles. Her particular songs appeal to a larger audience. Other country-western
singers are just as talented, but only a small percentage of the world
population is interested in that style of music.

This concept also applies to businesses. The entrepreneurs who
make lots of money assume that they are more talented than the entrepreneurs
who don't make much money, but in some cases they are simply producing
a product that has a larger potential market.

This concept also applies to food. Bananas are more popular with
humans than onions, but it is not because bananas are "better" than onions,
or that bananas deserve an Academy Award. It just so happens that human
emotions are more attracted to bananas.

Lady Gaga may be more popular worldwide than Whitney Houston, but that
doesn't mean that Gaga is a "better" singer or more "talented". And it
doesn't justify giving her an award. Since they produce different types
of music, the greater popularity of Gaga may simply be because her style
of music has a larger audience.

We cannot seriously measure a person's singing talent, but since we
enjoy competitions, it would be more sensible for us to judge singing talent
by setting up competitions in which all contestants have to sing the same
songs. That would allow us to compare their abilities. If Whitney Houston
and Lady Gaga had sung the same songs, we might have found that more people
preferred Whitney Houston's version!

2) Have you noticed the attempt
to hurt the US military?

Once you become accustomed to being suspicious of journalists,
you should notice that they are frequently trying to give the US military
a bad image. For example, did you notice that journalists recently showed
us a video in which US soldiers were peeing on dead Afghans?

First of all, this video was made many months ago, so who has
been hiding it all this time? Who decided
to release this video to the media? Why is it being released now?
Who encouraged the soldiers to create this video?

Second, notice the adjectives that the journalists are using. For example,
Wolf Blitzer describes the video as "disgusting".

Why would he be interested in giving worldwide publicity to a "disgusting"
video? Why not ignore the video on the grounds that it has no importance
to anybody?

Who benefits?

Whenever you analyze world events, remind yourself of the expression,
who
benefits? Who benefits by giving worldwide publicity to a "disgusting"
video? The only people who benefit are those who are trying to create
anger towards the US military.

Distinguish between solving
problems and instigating
fights

Bradley Manning, the homosexual US soldier who gave military
documents to Wikileaks, and who has been
nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize, is described by his supporters as
a "whistleblower" who is trying to help the world, but he is not providing
us with any intelligent analyses of our problems, and he is not offering
any solutions.

His supporters claim that he is exposing crimes, but he's not doing
anything to expose the Jewish involvement in the 9/11 attack, or the lies
that the Jews are promoting about the world wars and the Holocaust. He
is releasing only a small amount of information that is intended to hurt
the image of the US military. He is a troublemaker
who is trying to incite hatred. We could accuse him of committing
a "hate crime".

Likewise, the people who give worldwide publicity to "disgusting" videos
are also committing "hate crimes" because they are trying to stimulate
emotions of anger and hatred. They're not trying to help us understand
our problems.

In this
article about the "disgusting" video, there is a list of "Previous
US Army Scandals". Who benefits by including that list? We benefit
from intelligent analyses of our problems, but not by a list that
makes the US military appear to be a group of corrupt, violent, sadistic
savages. The people who create and promote these articles are doing the
equivalent of poking us in the ribs. They should be classified as
"criminals".

Don't let criminals set you
up!

I think that video of the US soldiers looks staged.
It reminds me of the photos of the Abu Ghraib "torture
and prisoner abuse". Judging by the attempts during the past 10 years
of Jews to get me to do or say something
that they could later use against me, I think that the Jews are routinely
arranging for embarrassing videos and photos of soldiers, politicians,
businessmen, and other people, and they keep them in storage until
they find a use for them.

Be suspicious whenever somebody tries to encourage you to do something
that you don't truly want to do. And be suspicious when the conversation
seems to be drifting to a subject that you would not normally talk about.

Let's hope the US military
is wising up!

The photo
below is confusing. Since most Americans have been convinced that the
Nazis are the most evil creatures to ever exist on the planet Earth, it
is not likely that the Marines accidentally
created a logo for themselves that is virtually identical to the Nazi SS
logo. So, how do we explain this photo?

It's possible that the Jews tricked the Marines into posing
for this photo in order to give the US military a bad image, but let's
hope that the Marines created that photo in order to send a message to
Wolf Blitzer and other Jews that they are becoming aware of the truth,
and fed up with their disgusting behavior.

3) Can you see the attempts
to instigate racial fights?

Once you become suspicious of journalists, you might notice
that certain journalists, mainly Jews, frequently give publicity to idiotic
cartoons, images, and remarks that they claim are insulting to some group
of people. For example, the Jews occasionally give publicity to a Mohammed
cartoon in an attempt to incite anger with Muslims. The Jews arrange for
these cartoons to be created, and then they give them worldwide publicity.

Recently I noticed that journalists are providing reports that "racist"
Americans are insulting the Chinese basketball player, Jeremy Lin.

Journalists could have ignored that remark, or they could have
described it as humourous, or as silly, or as idiotic,
but instead they described it as "racist".

The graphic of Jeremy Lynn's face with
a fortune cookie could also been described as humorous, or as
silly,
but instead, the journalists described this image with such adjectives
as regrettable,
controversial, and offensive.

The journalists are trying to incite anger among the Chinese people,
but rather than be offended by these images, the Chinese people should
become disgusted that the journalists are trying to start fights.

You ought to spend some time considering how much more peaceful
the world would be if the journalists were not constantly reminding the
Chinese people that they are victims of racist Americans; reminding women
that they are victims of sexist men; and reminding Americans that they
are victims of fanatical, suicidal Muslim terrorists who hate us and want
to attack us with nuclear bombs. These journalists should be described
as "con artists", "criminals", and "destructive influences on society".

4) John Kerry; a tough hockey
player? Or flea-bitten fool?

In January 2012, John Kerry had a broken nose and bruises
on his face. He proudly boasted
to the other government officials that it was from playing ice
hockey.

Kerry's injuries remind me of the day that President
Bush was watching a football game on television and bruised his face while
eating pretzels.

Do you believe either of their explanations?

Since politicians are sleeping with
dogs, it's not surprising that they seem miserable,
and that they are occasionally beaten, and sometimes killed.

I would not describe America as having a "government". I would say that
we have a group of criminals and their puppets. The voters ought
to be embarrassed and ashamed of what they have created, but they refuse
to take responsibility for their government.

5) Peggy is still
calling me on the phone!

After what I wrote about Peggy (here
is the first page), I assumed that she would never
contact me again. However, she has been calling me almost every
month since then!

Peggy repeats the same message over and over; specifically, she tells
me that she wants to leave America, and that she loves me. She uses the
"Damsel In Distress" trick over and over. How many more years is she going
to call me? How can her behavior even be described as "human"?

By the way, the last time she called me was on Saturday, 11 February
2012. I don't remember the time of day, but it was the same
day that Whitney Houston died. What a coincidence!
Or was she calling me to find out if I would say something about Whitney
Houston?

Also, what a coincidence that Whitney Houston died on the 11th day
of the month. Have you noticed that these criminals have a fascination
with numbers, especially the number 11?
I listed a few of the many coincidences on this
page. Also, the hotel room that Whitney Houston died in was room 434.
Guess what those digits add up to? What a coincidence!

6) Does "Marry
The Night" have hidden meanings?

Lady Gaga's latest music video, Marry The Night, reminds me
of the "California Gurl" video
by Katy Perry in that both videos seem to have hidden meanings about
how they became famous. Gaga's video starts with her being prepared for
surgery, and she cries a bit as she complains that she has nothing to lose.

If the rumors are true that she is a hermaphrodite, then perhaps
the surgery was to remove her male organs. Or perhaps the surgery indicates
that her decision to join the crime network is a permanent change
in her life, and that she will never be able to return to her previous
life.

After her mysterious surgery, she is wheeled into a room where other
people are standing on a balcony and watching her. Those people may be
the other famous entertainers who already went through the process of joining
the crime network.

The ceiling of the building is decorated with art, and it has
the words "The Cross Is My Anchor" written on it, but in a mirrored form.
(You can read the words in the image below because I reversed the image.)

Compare Lady Gaga to Whitney
Houston

Although Lady Gaga is often criticized and insulted, she gets
a lot of favorable publicity, and she has been able to work with some government
officials in an attempt to push the military into accepting homosexuals,
and to change society's attitudes towards "bullying".

What if Whitney Houston had dressed and behaved more like Lady Gaga?
And what if Whitney Houston was assisting the campaign to push the US military
into accepting homosexuals? If she had behaved more like Lady Gaga, would
she have been treated better by the journalists? I don't think so. I think
that if she had behaved more like Lady Gaga, she would have received even
more insults.

I think the Jews are promoting certain people, such as Lady Gaga, and
suppressing certain other people that they cannot compete with, or who
they are envious of, such as Whitney Houston.

Based on the way suspicious people - mostly Jews - have been pursuing
me for the past 10 years, and how they have been trying to manipulate me,
I wouldn't be surprised if the Jews were secretly encouraging Whitney Houston
to associate with people who would be a bad influence on her, such as drug
users. I also wouldn't be surprised if they were encouraging her to
sing songs that have low popularity.

How would you
treat Whitney Houston?

Imagine if you were the owner of a music business, and Whitney
Houston was one of your clients. How would you treat her? Would you encourage
her to associate with cocaine users or psychopaths? Would you encourage
her to go to bars and get drunk? Or would you encourage her to take care
of herself, develop her talent, and associate with people who will be a
good influence in her life?

The Jews do not work with us,
and they do not want to help us develop our talents. The Jews cannot
compete with us in a fair manner. They have dreary personalities,
and they are so ugly that they don't even like the way they look. Jews
frequently have cosmetic surgery to look more like us, but we never ask
a cosmetic surgeon to make us look more like a Jew. Some Jews have asked
Barbra Streisand why she never had cosmetic surgery to give her nose a
more human appearance, but I doubt if anybody asked Whitney Houston why
she didn't give herself a Jewish nose. Incidentally, I wonder if the story
of Pinocchio came about as people noticed
that the most prolific liars have big noses.

The Jews are dominating society, but their success doesn't come from
talent. Rather, it comes from murder, blackmail, manipulation, deception,
bribery, intimidation, and sabotage. They also depend upon pity, inheritances,
handouts, nepotism, and monarchies.

Getting publicity is not
an honor!

We assume that we are "special" if we win a Nobel Prize,
an Academy award, or are interviewed on television, but it seems that everybody
who gets publicity is either a member of the Jewish crime network, or one
of their "useful idiots".

Take a look at the black people who are given publicity on American
television. Are they your idea of "respectable" black people? I would describe
them as having dreary, dull, angry, or unpleasant personalities. They are
constantly whining about racism, sexism, or "The Man", and many of them
whine for handouts or reparations. Some of them are obnoxious, violent,
or stupid. I think they have been chosen by the Jews to give black people
a bad image, and to encourage bad attitudes among black people. I think
people like Whitney Houston are being suppressed.

We should be suspicious of everybody who gets publicity, and if any
of you gets publicity, you should ask
yourself, "Am I really special? Or am I a sucker who is being taken advantage
of?"

We need to raise standards
for influential people

Lady Gaga spends some of her time on a campaign to stop bullying
and promote homosexuals. She
claims to have been bullied when she was in school. I don't know what
she is like in real life, but from the few video interviews I've seen of
her, I would describe her as dreary, drab, dull, and extremely self-centered.
I can understand why she was bullied. She's not what I would describe as
happy, cheerful, or sociable. She does not have the type of personality
that I am attracted to.

I think Lady Gaga is yet another example of an artist who is unhappy,
and who is chasing after money and fame in a futile hope to end their misery.
I also think she is another example of why we must raise
standards for people in influential positions. She and other
people who are pushing their opinions on us are not
helping any of us. They are troublemakers who encourage pouting,
anger, whining, and fights. They are not providing us with intelligent
analyses of the world's problems, and they are not offering any solutions.

They don't work with us, either. Instead, they try to suppress
their competitors. They want to be Kings and Queens that we pamper and
worship.

7) Why is Jennifer Aniston in
the news so often?

I get most of my news from the Google news page, and I frequently
find articles that encourage us to feel sorry for, or admire, Jennifer
Aniston, and there are lots of other articles that criticize Angelina Jolie
and Brad Pitt. It seems as if a lot of journalists are furious that Brad
Pitt divorced Aniston, but why would any journalist care who Brad Pitt
is married to?

Some journalists accuse Jolie of "stealing"
Pitt, and although it's true that women are capable of deceiving men, nobody
is showing evidence that Jolie has fooled Brad Pitt. Furthermore, if Aniston
was such a desirable woman, then there would be lots
of other men who would be happy to replace Brad Pitt as her husband, but
where are all those men?

Do you care who Pitt marries? I
don't care who he selects to be his friend or spouse, although I like to
think that he and other people are having pleasant relationships. I don't
want to see people suffering. Why don't the journalists also want to see
Brad Pitt in a happy relationship? Why don't they tell Jennifer Aniston
to find a man she is more compatible with? Why are they conducting a "hate
campaign" against both Pitt and Angelina Jolie?

The headline of this
article, for example, is what I might expect from a bratty junior high
school girl: Jennifer Aniston Outshines Brad Pitt
and Angelina Jolie, and it has such remarks as, "but
there's one thing Jennifer Aniston now has that they don't -- a Hollywood
star."

The constant and childish attacks
of Pitt and Jolie and the endless attempts to bring pity to Aniston are
as suspicious as the idiotic articles about Whitney Houston's death. People
are getting divorced every day all around the world, so why don't they
attack any of the other divorced couples? Why are they concentrating on
Brad Pitt? Who benefits from this?

Years ago I ignored these type of reports on the grounds that they were
meaningless
Hollywood gossip, but with Peggy pursuing me year after year like a psychotic
savage,
and with the realization that our media is full of criminal Jews, I wonder
if we are watching one of the disgusting reactions that Jews have
to competitors. Specifically, we may be watching a coordinated
attempt to intimidate, control, and/or destroy Jolie and Pitt, and to bring
pity to Aniston, perhaps because she's partly Jewish.

I suspect that the anger towards Pitt and Jolie is actually
an intense envy. The Jews are probably
emotionally distraught that the public continues to be attracted to Pitt
and Jolie despite all of the insulting articles the Jews have written about
them.
Update: 15 March 2012:
More attacks on Angelina Jolie

Why should you
care about Jennifer Aniston?

You may assume that the people in Hollywood have no significance
to your life, but the people in the media are providing us with most
of our information about the world, and they also write and
publish school books, history books, and scientific magazines. They also
have a tremendous influence over children.
We are fools to allow criminals
to get control of our media. We should provide ourselves with a media of
respectable, intelligent journalists that we can
trust.

It's best to think of a nation as a very large
family. If you were the father of a large family, would you
allow some of your children to produce a newsletter and use it to conduct
obnoxious
and idiotic attacks on some of your other children? We should not
allow crime networks to use the media to eliminate their competitors and
manipulate us!

We are allowing our society to become a collection of people who don't
get along with one another, don't speak the same language, and routinely
fight and cheat one another. This is idiotic! A society should be a group
of people who enjoy one another, cooperate with one another,
and work together for the benefit of all.

We should identify
and stop criminals,
not ignore them

A lot of what appears to be meaningless Hollywood events might
actually be very significant. For example, why is the Kardashian
family in the news so often? It seems that Ryan Seacrest is promoting the
family, but why
that particular family?

Your first thought might be that Seacrest simply sees a profit
potential in the Kardashian family, but Seacrest is a highly paid, influential
man in the media, so we ought to consider the possibility that the Jewish
crime network is considering him as a replacement for one of the aging
criminals who currently dominate the media. If Seacrest is a "rising star"
in their crime network, then his actions are not simply for profit. Rather,
they are to help the crime network. Therefore, we should consider that
his promotion of the Kardashian family has some benefit to the crime network.

Did you know that the father of the Kardashian family, Robert,
was a very close friend of O.J. Simpson? He became Simpson's lawyer
when Simpson was accused of murdering his ex-wife, Nicole. As I've mentioned
in other files, I don't think Simpson murdered Nicole, but I suspect that
the reason his trial was so bizarre is because both Simpson and the prosecutor
were afraid to be completely honest because total honesty would have exposed
the Jewish crime network and the illegal activities that Simpson was involved
with.

I suppose Robert Kardashian knew the truth about Nicole's murder, and
he probably also knew a lot about the Jewish crime network. Therefore,
I wonder if his death by cancer at age 59 was "natural", or if the Jews
gave him something to cause cancer, and I also wonder if Seacrest is promoting
the Kardashian family in order to keep them under control, happy, and quiet.

Or maybe Robert Kardashian was working with the crime network in order
to control people such as O.J. Simpson, and perhaps the entire Kardashian
family is just a group of criminals!

For another example of how an apparently meaningless event may have
significance is that there are reports
that Simon Cowell might consider Janet Jackson to be a judge in the X Factor
television show. Is he considering her purely from the point of view of
whether she will bring profit to the
television show? Or is this a bribe to keep the Jackson family happy and
silent about the mysterious deaths of Michael Jackson and Whitney Houston?

Conclusion

I can't prove that Whitney Houston was murdered, and I can't
explain why the Kardashian family is in the news so often, but we don't
need the details of world events to realize that we are being
taken advantage of by criminals, and we don't need the details to improve
the world. All we have to do is identify and remove the people
who are causing trouble. But who among us is causing trouble?

The only way we can figure that out is to be suspicious of and
observe
our co-workers, neighbors, and relatives. Are any of your neighbors
a bad influence on society? What about the people you work with?
Each of us has thousands of relatives;
how many of them are causing trouble?

Our distant ancestors intimately knew the people they were living
with, and we need to stop the secrecy and learn about the people we
are living with. Then we need to pass judgment on which of those people
we don't want living with us!